Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@vitrion/zentria-mcp

@vitrion/zentria-mcp

Official
by vitrionbv
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

list-notes

Read-only

Fetch sales notes from Zentria CRM to review customer interaction history and support sales follow-ups. Supports search and pagination.

Instructions

List sales notes (GET /api/public/sales/notes). Scope: sales:read.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list-notes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch query.
pageNoPage number (default 1).
itemsPerPageNoItems per page (default 25, max 100).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the sales:read scope requirement and the exact GET endpoint, which are useful details, but it does not disclose other behaviors such as pagination defaults or response structure. The annotations cover the primary safety trait.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise, covering resource, HTTP method, endpoint, and required scope in a single sentence with no filler. Every element earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read-only list operation with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description together with the schema and annotation is nearly complete. It provides the endpoint and permission scope; only a brief mention of return format or pagination behavior could push it higher, but it is not essential here.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All three parameters (q, page, itemsPerPage) are fully described in the input schema with defaults and bounds. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, but it does not need to because schema coverage is 100%.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('List'), the resource ('sales notes'), and includes the REST endpoint and required scope. It unmistakably distinguishes this tool from get-note, create-note, update-note, and delete-note among the sibling tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use this tool—whenever a list of sales notes is needed—but it does not explicitly contrast it with related note tools like get-note or create-note. Usage context is clear from the verb and resource, but no when-not guidance is provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools